36.2650, Reviews: Integrating e-Portfolios into L2 Classrooms: Ricky Lam (2024)

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-36-2650. Thu Sep 04 2025. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 36.2650, Reviews: Integrating e-Portfolios into L2 Classrooms: Ricky Lam (2024)

Moderator: Steven Moran (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Managing Editor: Valeriia Vyshnevetska
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Mara Baccaro, Daniel Swanson
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org

Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Editor for this issue: Helen Aristar-Dry <hdry at linguistlist.org>

================================================================


Date: 04-Sep-2025
From: Diana P. Pineda [diana.pineda at udea.edu.co]
Subject: Applied Linguistics: Ricky Lam (2024)


Book announced at https://linguistlist.org/issues/35-2256

Title: Integrating e-Portfolios into L2 Classrooms
Subtitle: Education for Future
Series Title: New Perspectives on Language and Education
Publication Year: 2024

Publisher: Multilingual Matters
           http://www.multilingual-matters.com/
Book URL:
https://www.multilingual-matters.com/page/detail/?K=9781800415799

Author(s): Ricky Lam

Reviewer: Diana P. Pineda

SUMMARY
This book is useful for graduate students, language teachers and
stakeholders because it broadens the knowledge and skills necessary to
implement e-Portfolio in language learning classrooms. It offers
epistemological foundations and research findings that include
affective, linguistic and metacognitive characteristics of e-Portfolio
assessment. Each of the nine chapters of the book includes an
introduction, a set of four to seven topics conducive to developing
the main topic of each chapter, and a summary. At the end, the author
includes some appendixes and resources. In what follows, I present a
summary of each chapter.
Chapter 1. In this chapter the author introduces the topic of the
book, explaining how paper-based portfolios moved to e-Portfolios and
how they have been used in education in general. Lam explains that the
origin of portfolios dates from the 1980s in university classrooms. He
presents the three types of portfolios: working, showcasing and
assessment, as well as the four mediums of e-Portfolios: print
versions uploaded in classroom platforms, open-source platforms like
Moodle, web-based portfolios, and social media. He refers to
accessibility, visibility and storage to explain the pros of using
portfolios and computer literacy, the digital divide and privacy to
illustrate the cons. The author describes the appropriate
incorporation of e-Portfolios for writing development as they can help
students affectively, linguistically and metacognitively.
Chapter 2. The chapter comprehends the review of the literature of the
e-Portfolio, identifying three types of e-Portfolio related studies:
professional, empirical and theoretical. The author introduces the
transition from paper-based to electronic portfolios reported in two
studies 10 years ago. The first is a review of the literature in
multiple disciplines (Belgrad,2013), and the second  (Butler, 2006), a
presentation of the results of three action research studies carried
out in the United States where paper-based and electronic portfolios
were used. The author also presents comprehensive evidence-based
research on the topic of e-Portfolios between 1996 and 2012.
Lam’s (2023) thematic review reports three types of studies related to
e-Portfolio pedagogy and assessment, identifying the topics that have
been studied, what is missing, and where further exploration is
needed. The author’s first conclusion is that although empirical
research is adequate, theoretical research is insufficient. Further
investigation should include the identification of e-Portfolio trends,
developments, and impacts on teacher professional development. The
second area in which more research is required is the impact of
e-portfolios on students’ perceptions, affect, motivation, learning
engagement and self-regulated learning; also needed is more
publication of manuals that guide teachers on the use of e-portfolio
tools. The third area that requires more investigation is how
e-Portfolios can be integrated into English language curricula.
Chapter 3. The chapter presents the conceptual rationale for
e-Portfolios, introducing their elements, attributes and processes. It
also explains three educational theories –socio-constructivism,
assessment for learning and metacognition– that support the
integration of e-Portfolios into language learning. At the beginning,
Lam presents the four elements of paper-based portfolios: collection
of artefacts, selection of samples of students’ work, reflection, and
grading of the final portfolio submission that alternates self, peer
and teacher feedback to serve formative and summative purposes of
assessment. Regarding e-Portfolios, the stages include: the creation
of artefacts, students’ revisions after feedback, the curation or
organization of digital artefacts, and the circulation or display of
the portfolios. The three attributes that Lam identifies correspond to
1)  the socio-constructivist approach to portfolio-based instruction
and its interactive character, 2) the idea that e-Portfolio curricula
situate students at the center of their language learning process,
emphasizing agency, autonomy and dialogic learning, and 3) the help
students receive to set up and monitor learning goals, review and
adjust learning, and employ self and peer-assessment to reflect on
their learning.
E-Portfolio classrooms are supported in a socio-constructivist
approach to learning. Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD)
and scaffolding are two key principles that facilitate students’
learning, being scaffolding which provides explicit instruction,
shared demonstration, guided practice, and independent practice that
helps students learn. Although research findings on the use of
e-Portfolios have shown pedagogical impact such as the learning of
speaking, receptive and vocabulary skills, literacy development, and
research skills, there have also been challenges in their
applications. for instance, challenges revising drafts and giving
feedback in Facebook-based e-Portfolios (Aydin, 2014), technical
problems with social media-based e-Portfolio applications (Zheng &
Barrot, 2022), and the social rather than academic character of social
networking platforms like Facebook (Kelly, 2018). Lam explains that
portfolio assessment and assessment for learning are underpinned by
learner-centered pedagogies, and he depicts self-regulated learning as
a core component of e-Portfolios.
Chapter 4. In this chapter the author refers to curriculum planning
for teaching and assessing with e-Portfolios, describing features and
elements of e-Portfolio curricula, introducing the teaching of the
four language skills with e-Portfolios, presenting three approaches to
the integration of the e-Portfolio into English curricula, and
explaining procedural guidelines on how to plan and design e-Portfolio
curricula.
Inquiry, reflection and collaboration are the essential features and
elements of e-Portfolio curricula in L2 contexts. The E-portfolio
curriculum is inquiry-based because it is problem-solving oriented and
experiential to help students develop strategic competences to acquire
a second or foreign language. It includes reflective practices to
encourage students to continuously self-assess and self-reflect on
their progress. It is also collaborative because it includes
activities where peers, teachers, parents and external members
participate and create a sense of shared ownership.
The following are three approaches that articulate the e-Portfolio
curriculum approach to the teaching of the four language skills
(listening, speaking, reading and writing): a blended approach, a
provisional approach and a personal approach. The blended approach
consists of integrating e-Portfolio applications into the curriculum
through the compilation, curation and learning reflection through
multimedia artefacts that can be evaluated summatively. This can be
more time-consuming for teachers as students may need training. The
provisional approach can be used, for example, for the writing cycle
of a course where the collection, curation and reflection process can
be more focused. The personal approach occurs when students keep their
e-Portfolios as a learning companion throughout their school
experience, setting learning goals and selecting artefacts that
represent their learning trajectory; this allows them to be
independent and reflective and to take charge of their learning.
Regarding e-Portfolio curricula, Lam introduces three curriculum
designs: face-to-face (Delett et al., 2001), e-learning (Luić, 2020)
and convergence (Luić, 2020). He details the guidelines of an online
instructional design to help teachers plan and develop e-Portfolio
curricula.  This model comprehends four stages: 1) learning outcomes
that include a diagnosis of students’ aptitudes, learning needs and
preferences, 2) methodology or diverse types of instruction, 3)
communication patterns, or how teachers and students will keep in
contact for learning purposes, and 4) timeframe and frequency of
summative and formative assessment tasks in e-Portfolio curricula.
Chapter 5. This chapter explains the nature of e-Portfolio assessment,
its summative and formative purposes, its advantages and limitations,
and how it facilitates the integration of teaching, learning and
assessment. The author introduces the positivist paradigm, which
includes conventional assessment, as well as the constructivist
paradigm, in which alternative assessment is contained. He explains
that summative assessment evaluates learning, formative assessment
supports learning, and ipsative assessment –a subcategory of formative
assessment– facilitates students’ self-assessment. In his words, the
summative purpose of assessment equates to assessment of learning, the
formative purpose is equivalent to assessment for learning, and the
ipsative purpose reflects assessment as learning.
E-Portfolios have four advantages. They promote fair assessment
because learners can have a longer timeframe within which to showcase
their language skills than when they are under limited-time
conditions. They facilitate the evaluation of students’ higher order
thinking skills, including creativity, problem-solving and analysis.
They facilitate authentic and context-situated assessment. They are
aligned with curriculum reforms such as assessment for/as learning,
authentic assessment, and the use of feedback to enhance teacher and
student “feedback literacy”.
According to Lam the use of e-Portfolios as an instructional method
requires a knowledge base and practical skills. He presents three
learning-oriented elements of assessment that serve formative
purposes: process learning, developmental trajectories and
metacognition. He introduces four strategies to achieve the formative
purpose of e-Portfolio assessment: teaching students how to
self-assess, correcting students' work and scoring it only when they
have made the corrections, providing timely and professional advice on
the quality of students’ self and peer feedback, and  including audio-
or video-recording of their learning reflections. For the summative
purposes of e-Portfolios, Lam proposes evidence of the process of
learning (achievements), formal evaluation of learning artefacts
(products), use of self- and peer-assessment, and teacher-student
conferences (grades). The author claims that e-Portfolios facilitate
the integration of teaching, learning and assessment, as they
facilitate students’ self-regulation, familiarize students with
learning tasks that become assessment tasks, empower teachers’
development of language assessment literacy, and enhances students’
autonomy and language awareness.
Chapter 6. This chapter presents 34 pupils’ perceptions of e-Portfolio
assessment literacy in two secondary schools of Hong Kong. The author
begins by explaining the three major components of e-Portfolios:
compilation, conceptions of assessment and emotional experience.
Compilation refers to the process of creation, curation, revision and
dissemination of digital artefacts. The enactment of students’ agency
and autonomy are some characteristics of this component. Conceptions
refer to students’ perceptions of e-Portfolio assessment. Some studies
report that e-Portfolios help students to set, monitor and review
learning goals and develop language skills, as well as to improve peer
assessment when they provide feedback to their coursemates. Finally,
while some consider e-Portfolio assessment fulfilling, practical and
rewarding, some also find it tedious and time-consuming. Regarding
students’ emotional response to keeping e-Portfolios, this can be
positive when they share in a community of practice or negative when
they feel their privacy has been infringed.
In the study, students responded to a questionnaire, the results of
which were mainly positive. Students reported that what was expected
from them in e-Portfolios was clearly stated, that they could learn
from their mistakes through their e-Portfolio compilation, and that
the teacher feedback was constructive. Students were positive about
the summative and formative purposes of e-Portfolios and shared how
revising their classmates’ e-Portfolios helped them understand and
reflect formatively on their language learning. Their emotional
experience with e-Portfolios was more positive than negative,  privacy
and fair teacher summative judgement being their main concerns.
Regarding students’ understanding of e-Portfolios and the support they
received to create them, they considered teacher scaffolding
indispensable.  Among the highlighted findings from the interview are
the continuous assessment of learning and the sense of ownership that
e-Portfolios facilitated.
Chapter 7. In this chapter Lam presents a case study with two L2
teachers in Hong Kong who implemented e-Portfolio in online
instruction during the pandemic. The author shows how the participant
teachers integrated technology in the implementation of e-Portfolios,
as well as the affordances and constraints, and the pedagogical
implications. The affordances included teachers’ beliefs, computer
literacy and user-friendliness of e-Portfolio tools; and the
constraints comprised the provision of information technology support,
a testing culture and the integration of e-Portfolios into curricula.
Regarding beliefs, both teachers believed that e-Portfolios helped
students learn during remote teaching. The first teacher acknowledged
the process-writing innovation he could implement and the second one
how uploading pre-lesson preparation tasks facilitated flipped
teaching. In relation to computer literacy, the first teacher had
sound knowledge, but the second teacher was less confident. Lastly,
both teachers reported that Google Classroom as an e-Portfolio tool
was easy to use. About the constraints, both teachers claimed that the
training they had was not enough when the classes switched from
face-to-face to remote learning. Regarding the testing culture, both
teachers noted that the e-Portfolio contents were limited to what they
were expected to comply with in the public exam syllabus, leaving
little space for useful e-Portfolio contents compilation. Finally,
e-Portfolio implementation was carried out during the pandemic and not
sustained after the remote teaching ended. The pedagogical
implications include a call for e-Portfolio literacy and the need to
inquire about teachers’ beliefs, which facilitates the integration of
e-Portfolios into L2 settings.
Chapter 8. This chapter provides an overview of some software
e-Portfolio tools in terms of multimodality, mobility, synchronous
participation and interactivity. These tools are classified into four
types: self-authoring like Microsoft 365, which facilitates the
creation of multimodal artefacts with the insertion of links to
audios, videos or texts; web 2.0 applications such as wikis, weblogs,
and podcasts for peer sharing; commercial e-Portfolio software, for
instance Mahara, Schoology, and Seesaw, that facilitates the
assignment of homework and teacher/peer feedback; and social networks,
especially Facebook and Instagram, that motivate interactions. A
concern is the level of reflection with which students engage with
these e-Portfolio tools. This is aligned with the need to create a
culture of evidence that allows students to acquire metacognition
through the process of curating, self-assessing and showcasing
evidence of their learning. The chapter reviews six e-Portfolio
software tools: Google Classroom, Microsoft Teams, Schoology, Nearpod,
Anthology Portfolio and Instagram. The selection was made based on
their aim, target users, functions, instructional merits, drawbacks
and practicality.
Chapter 9. In this chapter the author presents a synopsis of the nine
chapters of the book as well as three takeaways concerning
e-Portfolios as an instructional method, as a learning-oriented
software application, and as alternative assessment. As an
instructional method, e-Portfolios are useful for remote and
face-to-face teaching and they can enhance teachers’ digital literacy.
E-Portfolio platforms support students’ out-of-school learning and
facilitate their participation when they curate, reflect and share
their work, as they enhance motivation, self-efficacy, independence
and metacognition. As alternative assessment, e-Portfolios serve both
summative and formative purposes through self and peer-assessment,
through peer-assessment and collaboration, and through timely
feedback, which also facilitates assessment for learning.
Further directions of the work presented in this book include
investigation of the components, of the theoretical rationale and
behavioral acts that facilitate teachers’ and students’ assessment
literacy and of the usefulness of e-Portfolio assessment in real
classrooms. The following topics deserve further exploration regarding
e-Portfolio assessment: 1) teachers’ and students’ engagement in
portfolio pedagogy and the compilation of experiences, 2) longitudinal
research that explores the learners’ language assessment literacy
trajectories with e-Portfolio programs, 3) e-Portfolio applications
that can influence students’ emotional well-being in L2 learning, and
4) the study of how social media platforms can be used to support L2
learning in virtual environments.
EVALUATION
This book contributes enormously to the value of continuous, formative
and scaffolded assessment when e-Portfolios are used to assess
language learning. The author gives a well-supported overview of the
knowledge, practices and skills that language teachers should develop
in their classes, shows directions for graduate students to do
research in this field, and offers stakeholders the potential of
e-Portfolios in education. The book is useful for language teachers in
EFL and SL contexts at the elementary, secondary and tertiary levels,
for pre-, in-service teachers, and for graduate students in the field
of language teaching. The  book’s step-by-step style is easy to follow
and sets the path for graduate students and researchers to continue
investigating this topic. The author provides portfolio assessment
with a theoretical and research basis as well as a practical one,
including two case studies of e-Portfolio implementation and an
overview of technological tools that can be used for it.
Some interesting parts of  this book are the author’s remarks about
the strong connection between portfolio assessment and assessment
for/as learning, as well as the trend in some countries like Hong Kong
of promoting an assessment culture and portfolio use, especially as a
counterweight to the impact of high stakes that authors like Shohamy
(2001) have reported. I found of value how portfolio assessment
unobtrusively encourages teaching, learning, curriculum development,
self- and peer-assessment and life-long learning. It caught my
attention that the author claims that the public character of the
portfolio increases its effectiveness in teaching and learning. He
also refers to the need for teachers to educate students on the use of
the portfolio as a learning and assessment tool, and he even refers to
a pedagogy of portfolio and a portfolio curriculum that sets the floor
for its implementation. A key factor mentioned in the book is the
inclusion of reflection in portfolio use as a primary way to impact
learning. The implementation of a portfolio in the construction of a
class community supports learning as a sociocultural construct; this
fact should resonate with the target audience. Lam highlights the rise
of portfolio use during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Some
characteristics of portfolios valuable for teachers are the processes
of creating, curating, reviewing, and publishing digital artefacts and
the dissemination of them with an audience. This is important because
portfolio assessment is far from being merely a look at a collection
of class artefacts, but rather is a step-by-step guided process that
includes preparation, selection, reflection and sharing. The
collaborative approach that portfolio use facilitates contributes to
learning as a social construct.
REFERENCES
Aydin, S. (2014) EFL writers’ attitudes and perceptions towards
F-portfolio use. TechTrends 58(2), 59–77.
Belgrad, S.F. (2013) Portfolios and e-Portfolios: Student reflection,
self-assessment, and goal-setting in the learning process. In J.H.
McMillan (ed.) Sage Handbook of Research on Classroom Assessment (pp.
331–346). Sage.
Butler, P. (2006). A Review of the Literature on Portfolios and
Electronic Portfolios.
https://creativecommons.org./licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/
Delett, J.S., Barnhardt, S. and Kevorkian, J.A. (2001) A framework for
portfolio assessment in the foreign language classroom. Foreign
Language Annals 34(6), 559–565.
Kelly, N. (2018) Student perceptions and attitudes towards the use of
Facebook to support the acquisition of Japanese as a second language.
Language Learning in Higher Education 8(2), 217–237.
Lam, R. (2023). E-portfolios: What we know, what we don’t, and what we
need to know. RELC Journal 54(1), 208-215.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688220974102
Luić, L. (2020). Challenges of digital age curriculum convergence
[Paper presentation]. ICERI 2020 Proceedings.
http://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2020.1383
Shohamy. E. (2001) The Power of Tests.
Zheng, Y. and Barrot, J.S. (2022) Social media as an e-Portfolio
platform: Effects on L2 learners’ speaking performance. Language
Learning & Technology 26(1), 1–19.
ABOUT THE REVIEWER
Diana Pineda holds a Ph.D. in Teaching, Learning and Culture from the
University of Texas at El Paso, United States. She has worked teaching
English as a foreign language (EFL) in Colombia and been a teacher
educator at the undergraduate and graduate level since 2000. After her
Ph.D., she focused her research on teachers’ professional development
to support their practices in the classroom. She is currently working
on a study with English schoolteachers from rural  Colombia, where she
has found a connection between teachers’ practical knowledge and their
funds of knowledge. Her interests include classroom assessment and
language assessment literacy.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------

********************** LINGUIST List Support ***********************
Please consider donating to the Linguist List, a U.S. 501(c)(3) not for profit organization:

https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=87C2AXTVC4PP8

LINGUIST List is supported by the following publishers:

Bloomsbury Publishing http://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/

Cambridge University Press http://www.cambridge.org/linguistics

Cascadilla Press http://www.cascadilla.com/

De Gruyter Brill https://www.degruyterbrill.com/?changeLang=en

Edinburgh University Press http://www.edinburghuniversitypress.com

John Benjamins http://www.benjamins.com/

Language Science Press http://langsci-press.org

MIT Press http://mitpress.mit.edu/

Multilingual Matters http://www.multilingual-matters.com/

Narr Francke Attempto Verlag GmbH + Co. KG http://www.narr.de/

Netherlands Graduate School of Linguistics / Landelijke (LOT) http://www.lotpublications.nl/

Peter Lang AG http://www.peterlang.com


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-36-2650
----------------------------------------------------------